Land Rover Range Rover Sport 2005 vs Jeep Grand Cherokee 2006
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 4.2 Petrol | 3.7 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 390 HP | 201 HP | |
| Torque: | 550 NM | 307 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 7.6 seconds | 10.7 seconds | |
|
Land Rover Range Rover Sport is more dynamic to drive. Land Rover Range Rover Sport engine produces 189 HP more power than Jeep Grand Cherokee, whereas torque is 243 NM more than Jeep Grand Cherokee. Thanks to more power Land Rover Range Rover Sport reaches 100 km/h speed 3.1 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 15.9 | 13.2 | |
|
The Jeep Grand Cherokee is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Land Rover Range Rover Sport consumes 2.7 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Jeep Grand Cherokee, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Land Rover Range Rover Sport could require 405 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 86 litres | 78 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 540 km in combined cycle | 590 km in combined cycle | |
| 720 km on highway | 760 km on highway | ||
| Jeep Grand Cherokee gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
| Ground clearance: | 227 mm (8.9 inches) | 180 mm (7.1 inches) | |
| Because of the higher ground clearance, Land Rover Range Rover Sport can perform better on bad roads - it can go over higher obstacles and bumps. At the same time, the higher ground clearance can reduce stability and handling on paved roads, especially at higher speeds. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 420'000 km | 420'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 4 years | 11 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Land Rover Range Rover | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Jeep Cherokee, Dodge RAM, Dodge Durango, Dodge Nitro | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Jeep Grand Cherokee might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Jeep Grand Cherokee engine has hydraulic tappets (lifters), providing quieter operation and no need for periodic adjustment, but they are more complex in design and can cause serious engine damage in case of failure. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.79 m | 4.75 m | |
| Width: | 1.93 m | 1.87 m | |
| Height: | 1.78 m | 1.74 m | |
|
Land Rover Range Rover Sport is larger. Land Rover Range Rover Sport is 4 cm longer than the Jeep Grand Cherokee, 6 cm wider, while the height of Land Rover Range Rover Sport is 4 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 958 litres | 978 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down, if possible |
2013 litres | 1909 litres | |
| Despite its longer length, This could mean that the Land Rover Range Rover Sport uses more space in the cabin, so the driver and passengers could be more spacious and comfortable. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Land Rover Range Rover Sport (by 104 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.6 meters | 11.2 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Land Rover Range Rover Sport is 0.4 metres more than that of the Jeep Grand Cherokee, which means Land Rover Range Rover Sport can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight: | 3`125 kg | no data | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | no data | average | |
| Average price (€): | 5200 | 5200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Land Rover Range Rover Sport has
|
Jeep Grand Cherokee has
| |